|
|
|
|
|
|
by twainer
5342 days ago
|
|
|
Too many partners in my opinion. MTV blew up not only because of the subject matter but also because it was one of the only channels that had a youth market at all. It was like the internet as a TV channel - metaphorically-speaking. It's very telling that as cable TV became a fractured medium with 100s of 'extra' channels, channels like MTV had to turn to the me-too and less-expensive/higher-margin programming of reality shows and also to the proliferation-per-channel idea as well - where there are now - what - 6 MTV channels. 1980's MTV literally gave us a music movement; 2011 version is mostly Jersey Shore and Teenage Mom . . . It seems an odd choice for Youtube/Google to set up an old format of business as the straw man they're 'disrupting'. If one really wanted to disrupt the endless seas of mediocre, center-of-the-bell-curve content, they'd have to focus much more narrowly, invest much more heavily, and share the proceeds much more generously. I'm not saying I know the numbers, but none of these are a characteristic of Youtube or Google when it comes to content - that's for sure. The sheer volume of their partnership agreements implies a see-which-spaghetti-sticks approach. The article would like to imply that Youtube is going to move [nobly] beyond it's root essentially as a distribution system. Distributors, as a business, care about 'good enough'; they rarely bother with 'great'. In my opinion, Youtube/Google have had a long free ride on the content of others - both user-generated and the kind that 'fell off the back of a truck'. I hardly see them as a capable partner for truly creative content production. Anyway, Lady Gaga is the new MTV :P |
|
|
First, radio stations were dying. They were being sucked up into nationwide conglomerates and changing from independent DJs with free reign to play whatever they thought was interesting to being forced into playing whatever generated the most revenue at the least cost with the least risk while cramming as many commercials into every hour as possible. In short, becoming soulless, disenfranchising people with interest in niche or innovative music, and most especially abdicating their former prominent role of being a place where people found new music.
Second, MTV happened to be launched at a time when there were very few music videos. Since they had no budget for any other programming they had to play a very eclectic mix of music, they couldn't afford to pick and choose much. They thus became one of the most avant garde radio stations in the entire US and became one of the only conduits between a lot of innovate new music (metal, punk, etc.) and a ravenous demographic (teens) who were otherwise cut off from that music due to the diminution of radio.
Once MTV had significant revenue they fell into the trap of thinking they needed "real" programming instead of just music videos, and that thinking persisted until almost all of their music content was driven away. MTV is now about as relevant as the average irrelevant pseudo-local radio station.